Drop The Charges

It's been more than a year since a Superior Court judge set aside the conviction, based on false evidence, of Norwich substitute schoolteacher Julie Amero and ordered a new trial.

But state prosecutors are taking their sweet time in deciding whether to take Ms. Amero to court again - or to make things right by seeking dismissal of the case.

Meanwhile, with the humiliating charges against her still active, Ms. Amero twists in the wind. This is a tragic miscarriage of justice.

Ms. Amero was arrested in November 2004 and charged with risk of injury to a minor. She was held responsible by authorities for allowing seventh-graders to view pornographic pop-up messages on a classroom computer the month before.

A jury believed the state.

But a team of computer security experts from across the nation concluded after her conviction that Ms. Amero herself was a victim - of malicious software and the school district's failure to update its technology. In June last year, Judge Hillary B. Strackbein set aside the conviction and ordered a new trial, citing "erroneous" testimony and "false information" used in the state's case.

Ms. Amero has suffered throughout this ordeal, losing a baby and reportedly losing at least one job because of the conviction and enduring stress.

When Courant columnist Rick Green recently asked prosecutors what plans they had for Ms. Amero, they had little to say. One, Michael Regan, state's attorney for the New London district, said the case "is not a high priority for us."

By burying her case in paperwork, delaying decisions and denying her justice, prosecutors are treating Ms. Amero almost as if she were a Guantanamo detainee. It's past time to end the agony.